One of the principal differences between Democrats and Republicans is that Democrats believe that the remedy to every problem is government action and Republicans favor private action in the main. This is a difference in philosophy that has separated the parties for as long as I can remember.
This gives rise to the following question: why do Democrats trust government when it has shown itself to be totally incompetent?
I pondered this question for what seems like that 100th time this morning when I read about the fiasco in Seattle. That city has purchased a fleet of new street cars so that it can expand its transit system. The cost for the new cars alone is reported to be $52 million. The expansion of the system and the purchase of the new cars was announced with a big show by Seattle mayor Jenny Durkan.
But there's a problem in Seattle. The new street cars being built will not fit on the existing tracks and are too big to be serviced in the city's current maintenance facilities. Apparently, the City overlooked these difficulties while ordering and buying the new fleet of street cars.
The estimate cost to deal with this problem will push the cost of the new cars higher by 50%. That's the estimate from the city. Translated into truth, that surely means that the ultimate cost will double or, more likely, triple.
It's easy to be astounded that Seattle could order new street cars without first making sure that the ones purchased could actually be used on the existing tracks and repair facilities. No one could be that negligent, you would think. Of course, that's because you don't think like the government. The Seattle government, like so many others, focuses on what will provide good press for those in office and hardly at all on things like efficiency, accuracy and value for money spent. If the street cars don't fit, it's no problem. The city will just order some changes and the taxpayers will have to cough up the cash to pay for the remedy.
This is not an unusual event. In New York City, for example, there have been the following cases:
1. A new bridge over navigable water was built for the commuter rail system which left a channel for boats that was five feet narrower than required by federal law. Somehow, despite the involvement of over 100 people in the design, no one noticed the problem until the middle of construction. The result was that the cost of the bridge rose by about 50%.
2. A new maintenance facility was built for commuter rail cars. Contracts were signed that made the total cost of the facility roughly $150 million. Because of the mismanagement by the government, there were all sorts of changes and disputes that made the ultimate cost close to $500 million.
3. The biggest of them all came when a tunnel system was built to bring some commuter trains from Long Island into Grand Central Terminal. Because of design and management problems with the construction, the project which was to be completed in 2008 is still underway. The cost has gone up astronomically. A $3 billion project will now cost well in excess of $20 billion. If it is ever completed, the project will allow some people on Long Island to come into the East Side of Manhattan rather than going to Penn Station on the West Side. Meanwhile, the cost of the project is so large that maintenance on the rest of the rail and subway systems is being starved of cash with the result that breakdowns are way up and the performance of the system is way down.
So why would anyone think that the government can do anything right. Sure, there are tasks that only the government can do. Running the military, for example, requires the government. But doing something like building transit systems should be farmed out to private contractors.
This gives rise to the following question: why do Democrats trust government when it has shown itself to be totally incompetent?
I pondered this question for what seems like that 100th time this morning when I read about the fiasco in Seattle. That city has purchased a fleet of new street cars so that it can expand its transit system. The cost for the new cars alone is reported to be $52 million. The expansion of the system and the purchase of the new cars was announced with a big show by Seattle mayor Jenny Durkan.
But there's a problem in Seattle. The new street cars being built will not fit on the existing tracks and are too big to be serviced in the city's current maintenance facilities. Apparently, the City overlooked these difficulties while ordering and buying the new fleet of street cars.
The estimate cost to deal with this problem will push the cost of the new cars higher by 50%. That's the estimate from the city. Translated into truth, that surely means that the ultimate cost will double or, more likely, triple.
It's easy to be astounded that Seattle could order new street cars without first making sure that the ones purchased could actually be used on the existing tracks and repair facilities. No one could be that negligent, you would think. Of course, that's because you don't think like the government. The Seattle government, like so many others, focuses on what will provide good press for those in office and hardly at all on things like efficiency, accuracy and value for money spent. If the street cars don't fit, it's no problem. The city will just order some changes and the taxpayers will have to cough up the cash to pay for the remedy.
This is not an unusual event. In New York City, for example, there have been the following cases:
1. A new bridge over navigable water was built for the commuter rail system which left a channel for boats that was five feet narrower than required by federal law. Somehow, despite the involvement of over 100 people in the design, no one noticed the problem until the middle of construction. The result was that the cost of the bridge rose by about 50%.
2. A new maintenance facility was built for commuter rail cars. Contracts were signed that made the total cost of the facility roughly $150 million. Because of the mismanagement by the government, there were all sorts of changes and disputes that made the ultimate cost close to $500 million.
3. The biggest of them all came when a tunnel system was built to bring some commuter trains from Long Island into Grand Central Terminal. Because of design and management problems with the construction, the project which was to be completed in 2008 is still underway. The cost has gone up astronomically. A $3 billion project will now cost well in excess of $20 billion. If it is ever completed, the project will allow some people on Long Island to come into the East Side of Manhattan rather than going to Penn Station on the West Side. Meanwhile, the cost of the project is so large that maintenance on the rest of the rail and subway systems is being starved of cash with the result that breakdowns are way up and the performance of the system is way down.
So why would anyone think that the government can do anything right. Sure, there are tasks that only the government can do. Running the military, for example, requires the government. But doing something like building transit systems should be farmed out to private contractors.
No comments:
Post a Comment